Retracking a poor bass performance, unethical or necessary?

[Chaellus]

first of all i d have to say changing the the take without the concent of the band is very unethical adn if i as an which i am as well on the side where to find out that my engineer was doing this id honestly never record with him or his facilty ever agian by doing this you are hurting your buisness and possible chances of advancing or making a career of such if you continue to do this... if you feel strongly about it benifiting the band you must inform then first and have there approval

[Rufuss Sewell]

I haven't read this whole thread so this might have been brought up, but I just wanted to mention that several years ago the kids had a sense that it wasn't cool to cheat by editing parts or having me record the things they couldn't get right. But nowadays it seems like that bands expect me to take their shitty performances and make them sound good any way possible. Kids aren't used to hearing mistakes from their favorite bands. They want perfection. I usually tell them the only way they'll get that if for me to quantize everything and a lot of times I play their parts for them. They don't seem to care. As long as it sounds good. I won't do it without telling them, but I end up telling them more often these days.

God I wish they would start teaching music in school again!

[Duardo]

There's a whole theme in this thread that there's something sacrosanct about some inexperienced band that's rushed for time and maybe doesn't even have a complete grasp of what's going on around them, and the engineer that will tip slightly backwards to help them out is some kind of power-mad control freak.

Do you really think that replaying one of their parts, without telling them, is actually helping them?

Did your parents do your homework for you?

[PoorGlory]

Originally Posted by Duardo

Do you really think that replaying one of their parts, without telling them, is actually helping them?

Did your parents do your homework for you?

No, but my parents weren't graded on MY homework.

A lot of you seem to miss the point.... No one wants to have to do this. Like I said, I have yet to do it, because I do believe it is unethical to a point.

So is cheating on your taxes, getting out of speeding ticket, not telling the cashier at the store that they gave you too much change back....

Lighten the f*ck up. If some shitty band no one heard of is recording with me and they suck, why would I even waste my time learning their parts and re-recording the tracks? I wouldn't, and neither would any of you so it seems. There are very few times I have considered doing this, and in the end it didn't happen because there were better ways of achieving what needed to be achieved without deception. Deception is the LAST option. Given that, I find it hilarious that so many of you are angrily and vehemently opposed to such a minor thing as secretely re-tracking a shitty bass part.... aren't there more important things to get a torqued up about these days? Seriously... priorities.

You want to preach ethics and integrity and fairness, fine.... as long as your studio is on the up and up: Do you report studio income? Is your studio a registered business? If not, how do you sleep at night knowing you are taking business away from the studios that rely on these shitty bands to put food on the table? I know how I sleep at night: I don't give a shit. I run a project studio in my basement from which I make some money, but not more than I spend on gear. I will do everything and anything to get the most gigs possible, and churn out the best product possible. I don't advocate trickery, and I go above and beyond for not only my recording clients, but also my day job clients as well. I want to perform my job at 110% of my ability, and with consistency. I have ZERO patience for those I have to rely on (at either of my jobs) that aren't prepared to pull their weight. That includes under-qualified techs at my day job who's weight I then have to pull, as well as bass players who couldn't so much as hum a groove.

No one shits a give about your integrity if they've never heard your name. I'm not going to accept a poor performance from anyone and then have my name attached to the project. I have invested too much time, money, and energy into doing what I do the best I can, only to have it tainted by some dipshit who was too busy burying his nose in a pile of blow the night before to practice. The bottom line is that if you don't come to the rodeo with your spurs ready to go, the bull will trample your ass (great analogy, if I do say so myself), and no one else will care. Don't come to my studio and waste my time with shitty playing and then blame me for a substandard album.

Don't like having your shit re-tracked? Play it right the first 300 takes. Don't make me want to do it. Unethical? Yea, sure. But I don't care.

MOST IMPORTANT POINT: For the record, I do believe an engineer should be invisible during the session (unless he/she is acting as producer as well). I try not to give any band an attitude, ever.... and the band always leads the sessions if they do not desire my input other than as an engineer. The artist also always has the say in what takes are to be used in the mix. Always. The problem is when take after take is consistently bad, and they just throw their hands up and say "**** it.... just edit it". That to me is unacceptable. That's what makes me want to do everything in my power to fix the problem the best way I can. I mean, I'll do little edits here and there to save an otherwise great take. But I'm done with chopping up entire parts and shifting them all over the place. My job is to make your record sound good, not to put a diaper on your playing and catch all the shit that falls out.

I applaud those of you with the patience to deal with that on a constant basis. I've been doing that for too long, and I'm done with it. I won't work with bands like that anymore, which probably explains why I've never had to re-track a part in secret.

[Mark Kaufman]

Sounds like a power-mad control freak to me. If your glorious "name is attached to a project" it's because you deigned to work for a client in the first place. How easy is it to tell them you're re-dubbing on your own? If they agree, you're all good. If they don't, you can either live with it or refuse to continue.

Two reasons not to do so:

1 - getting the money is more important than your name. (Because you could always wash your hands of them instead.)

2 - you really don't give a shit so you go the unethical route whenever you decide.

Ethics. Sanctimonious bullcrap? Those who think so are the ones to avoid.

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by Mark Kaufman

Sounds like a power-mad control freak to me. If your glorious "name is attached to a project" it's because you deigned to work for a client in the first place. How easy is it to tell them you're re-dubbing on your own? If they agree, you're all good. If they don't, you can either live with it or refuse to continue.

Two reasons not to do so:

1 - getting the money is more important than your name. (Because you could always wash your hands of them instead.)

2 - you really don't give a shit so you go the unethical route whenever you decide.

Ethics. Sanctimonious bullcrap? Those who think so are the ones to avoid.

Agreed. If my precious reputation is so fragile that a bands playing is blamed on me, I don't have much of a reputation to begin with.

[PoorGlory]

Originally Posted by Mark Kaufman

Sounds like a power-mad control freak to me. If your glorious "name is attached to a project" it's because you deigned to work for a client in the first place. How easy is it to tell them you're re-dubbing on your own? If they agree, you're all good. If they don't, you can either live with it or refuse to continue.

Two reasons not to do so:

1 - getting the money is more important than your name. (Because you could always wash your hands of them instead.)

2 - you really don't give a shit so you go the unethical route whenever you decide.

Ethics. Sanctimonious bullcrap? Those who think so are the ones to avoid.

Money is more important than your name? **** no. If money is more important to you than your reputation for a quality product, you're definitely in the wrong business. How far do your "ethics" go when you put money in front of all else? When you have no money, your name is all you have.

And I do give a shit. That's the whole reason for this argument. All of my clients are from word of mouth. Period. The only reason people come to me is because they liked what I did with other bands. No one is going to say "Wow, that band/record/song sucks, but the production is good. Let's call that engineer".

Besides, you should all be glad there are people like me who refuse to put up with untalented loser's bullshit. How else would all the other basement engineers who sit there and screw with Beat Detective for hours make any money?

[Mark Kaufman]

Well, I get your point, and sorry to get bombastic in a personal way...I don't know you so it's wrong for me to point a finger like that.

But surely you see the disconnect? Your reputation means more to you than money, and you're good enough to have word-of-mouth business. But you also work with bullshit losers and that's exactly how you feel about them. So why not tell them how you really feel? And why not inform them when you re-track? Only reason I can figure is that you don't care. Right now, that's another addition to your reputation, like it or not.... I'm just sayin'.

[BadJones]

Originally Posted by Mark Kaufman
Sounds like a power-mad control freak to me. If your glorious "name is attached to a project" it's because you deigned to work for a client in the first place. How easy is it to tell them you're re-dubbing on your own? If they agree, you're all good. If they don't, you can either live with it or refuse to continue.

Two reasons not to do so:

1 - getting the money is more important than your name. (Because you could always wash your hands of them instead.)

2 - you really don't give a shit so you go the unethical route whenever you decide.

Ethics. Sanctimonious bullcrap? Those who think so are the ones to avoid.

Totally Agree. If you overdub my playing and don't tell me, there will be hell to pay, no matter how much I suck. You took my money to record me not play on my CD.

[henryrobinett]

Originally Posted by BadJones

Totally Agree. If you overdub my playing and don't tell me, there will be hell to pay, no matter how much I suck. You took my money to record me not play on my CD.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by BadJones

Totally Agree. If you overdub my playing and don't tell me, there will be hell to pay, no matter how much I suck. You took my money to record me not play on my CD.

This is exactly what I've been saying. It's ass kicking time if someone ever did that to my band. You guys who think that this is all "sanctomonious bullshit" need to put yourself in the band's shoes and then think about how you would feel if something like this was done to you. This is why those of us who are saying this is wrong have responded so "vehemently". It's because it IS WRONG. There's no maybe about it.

Also, PoorGlory, dude..... If you hate your job so much, why don't you move onto something instead of engineering. Seriously, your comments make you sound like you're about to have a nervous breakdown from dealing with all of the "bullshit losers". If you don't like dealing with these guys, then don't take them on as clients. It's as simple as that. However, lying to them is not the way to handle this situation. If the band saying "just edit it" is unacceptable, fine, then don't edit it. But how does that situation magically then become acceptable by you retracking a part on the sly? You would only be compounding the problem, not fixing it.

[joelpatterson]

Originally Posted by Quint

... You guys who think that this is all "sanctomonious bullshit" need to put yourself in the band's shoes and then think about how you would feel if something like this was done to you.....

Someone made my band sound better? Why *sputter! cough! gasp!* off with their head!

I wish there was some way to convey to you what being a responsible adult around less-reponsible less-adult people was like, but it's pointless.

Sometimes, you just have to take the steps that need to be taken, and be prepared to let a vengeful God of wrath be your judge. You just do.

[henryrobinett]

But Joel -- the whole issue is not so much in doing it or not doing it, but doing it on the sly. It's the doing and not telling. What problem do you have here? Why are you unwilling to acknowledge that that might be a wrong thing? Or just tell them about it. This is what I don't get. The whole issue is about the secrecy. What makes it OK to lie about this?

[joelpatterson]

No, sure you should tell them... unless in your crafty understanding of human nature you'll think they'd be unprepared to handle the truth, would get all defensive, and would display the same wretched judgement that caused them to leave the cruddy bass track the way it was, i.e., insisting you go ahead and mix it "the way we played it, you over-stepping power-mad control freak!"

In that case, you should do it quietly and not make a big deal. Observe carefully how they respond to hearing the playback... do they grin when they hear their song realized in a kickin', rockin' way? Are they happy it sounds good? Or does a curious pall of uncertainly spread across their features, and one of them mumbles... "Gee. I thought we played it alot sloppier. We should question how this cookin' playback came about, if there was any sleight of hand involved, and if there was, have all of that reversed so we can walk away with a shitty CD and thus teach ourselves a valuable lesson: learn to be better players. Otherwise, our participation in this whole project will spell the doom of music as we know it!"

[henryrobinett]

Well that's just really disappointing. I got to say it again. I'd scream bloody murder. I need to hear my playing. I need to hear it. Especially in my formative stages I needed to hear it. Thank god I learned to play when I did.

I just think you have no F***ing right. Sorry, but few things have infuriated me this much in recent GS history. Nobody has any f***ing right without my foreknowledge.

[joelpatterson]

And I would dare say you and the kid bandleader's friend's little brother who was roped into playing bass where everybody sort of realized he couldn't handle it but were stuck and had no other options are never going to be the same person.

[henryrobinett]

Joel -- just so there's no hard feelings -- I'm in love with you and I want to have your children. So let's keep my little outburst in perspective, shall we?

[joelpatterson]

*smooch*

[Quint]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

Someone made my band sound better? Why *sputter! cough! gasp!* off with their head!

I wish there was some way to convey to you what being a responsible adult around less-reponsible less-adult people was like, but it's pointless.

Sometimes, you just have to take the steps that need to be taken, and be prepared to let a vengeful God of wrath be your judge. You just do.

I wish there was some way to convey to you that you continue to gloss over the finer points of this discussion, but it's pointless.

Responsibility? Dude, you have a responsibility to be truthful to your clients and you're going to sit here and spout nonsense about responsibility? Get bent. Really, I mean that. You're a ****ing joke. No self respecting engineer should ever act as you do.


You know, I really do hope that you get caught. You're level of arrogance is astounding.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

Otherwise, our participation in this whole project will spell the doom of music as we know it!"

No, actions like your's have a far more negative impact on "music as we know it".

[Quint]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

And I would dare say you and the kid bandleader's friend's little brother who was roped into playing bass where everybody sort of realized he couldn't handle it but were stuck and had no other options are never going to be the same person.

This matters none.

[sanddigger1]

Originally Posted by joelpatterson

Someone made my band sound better? Why *sputter! cough! gasp!* off with their head!

Except that it is not 'my' band anymore, since a frustrated musician who's supposed to work as a sound engineer decided to replace the bass player without telling anyone. Will he go on tour with them to do the same on stage ?
It is not 'making a band sound good', it is replacing the band by a different one.

It has been written dozens of time : it is a producer's decision, not an engineer's one.

[PoorGlory]

Originally Posted by Quint

This is exactly what I've been saying. It's ass kicking time if someone ever did that to my band. You guys who think that this is all "sanctomonious bullshit" need to put yourself in the band's shoes and then think about how you would feel if something like this was done to you. This is why those of us who are saying this is wrong have responded so "vehemently". It's because it IS WRONG. There's no maybe about it.

Also, PoorGlory, dude..... If you hate your job so much, why don't you move onto something instead of engineering. Seriously, your comments make you sound like you're about to have a nervous breakdown from dealing with all of the "bullshit losers". If you don't like dealing with these guys, then don't take them on as clients. It's as simple as that. However, lying to them is not the way to handle this situation. If the band saying "just edit it" is unacceptable, fine, then don't edit it. But how does that situation magically then become acceptable by you retracking a part on the sly? You would only be compounding the problem, not fixing it.

I don't take those clients anymore, which I why I have never had to do something so underhanded. If you're going to call me out by name and question my choice of career, at least read and comprehend what I wrote before spewing out the same regurgitated shit that I've been reading the whole thread. Offense taken.

You all think it's about what I (the engineer) think about the performance. I am the first one to accept a mediocre bass track instead of spending 4 hours on one bass fill. It's when the player can't nail it down, and the band insists I can make it better with f*cktons of editing, often putting me in an impossible situation of pretty much sculpting part of a take out of bits and pieces of other parts of the song, other takes, etc. That is what I'm talking about. I don't have time to sit there and worry about which parts I can personally play better.... Who cares? If the part works on any level, I say leave it.

I seriously wonder why all you people are attacking myself and others who feel the same, over and over. Worry about yourself. Don't pay so much attention to how complete strangers run their businesses. Get off your pedestal and get to Autotuning.

[Quint]

Originally Posted by PoorGlory

I don't take those clients anymore, which I why I have never had to do something so underhanded. If you're going to call me out by name and question my choice of career, at least read and comprehend what I wrote before spewing out the same regurgitated shit that I've been reading the whole thread. Offense taken.

Man, you yourself just admitted that this is underhanded yet you don't understand why others would call you out on that? I know that you said you don't take those kinds of clients anymore. Maybe I could have worded my previous post to include that fact. However, it still doesn't change the fact that you have said, multiple times, that, if you did have a client like this come in, you wouldn't have any problem retracking a part on your own, without the band's consent. That is what is wrong and arguing over semantics won't change that.

Originally Posted by PoorGlory

You all think it's about what I (the engineer) think about the performance. I am the first one to accept a mediocre bass track instead of spending 4 hours on one bass fill. It's when the player can't nail it down, and the band insists I can make it better with f*cktons of editing, often putting me in an impossible situation of pretty much sculpting part of a take out of bits and pieces of other parts of the song, other takes, etc. That is what I'm talking about. I don't have time to sit there and worry about which parts I can personally play better.... Who cares? If the part works on any level, I say leave it.

I seriously wonder why all you people are attacking myself and others who feel the same, over and over. Worry about yourself. Don't pay so much attention to how complete strangers run their businesses. Get off your pedestal and get to Autotuning.

I completely understand how the situation you describe above would be totally frustrating. However, what do you mean you don't have time? Engineering is a money for time business. They're being charged by the hour or day aren't they? When it takes four hours for either overdubbing or editing a bass part while the rest of the band sits around and the project basically grinds to a halt, they might change their minds. Let that happen a couple of times and I bet you they change their attitudes real quick. They'll either accept the lesser performances and move on or they'll come up with the extra money that it's going to take for the extra time involved in correcting their mistakes (either in the computer or in overdubs). Even if they ask you to overdub something to save time, they still are the ones who made that decision, not you. At least that way, everything would be laid out on the table. That is the point here. There's absolutely no reason to lie to them.

The reason we're "attacking" you (and Joel and Slave) is because you're advocating something that is so obviously WRONG. Also, your actions do affect us. Your actions result in two things.

First, if you cover the asses of mediocre bands by fixing everything (in the computer or retracking it yourself), you only help foster this modern day notion that anyone off of the street can come in and make an album that sounds professional. Do we really need more manufactured music like Ashley Simpson around?

Second, music is supposed to be about artistic expression. How is the band expressing itself if you go and play a part behind their back? You're robbing them of that expression. This concept is a very key part of music that is done the right way and for the right reasons. I know there are guys out there who look down on lesser guitar players (Dimebag Darrel vs. Kurt Cobain) because they deem one more technically proficient than the other. However, playing your instrument at 90 miles an hour isn't necessarily a prerequisite for making quality art. I'll take Nirvana any day of the week over somebody like Joe Satriani. Quality (technical proficiency, soulfullness, etc) is in the eye of the beholder (the band, first, and the listener, second). You are merely a bystander that is helping them to achieve their ideas, not creating their ideas for them. You have no artistic context here (to determine whether the band is going for Nirvana or Satriani type proficiency) and, thus, possess nothing that places you in the same position as the band to make artistic decisions like this. A crappy "underperformed" solo by Dimebag Darell might be a perfect solo for a Nirvana song. You just have no way of knowing and, as a result, you shouldn't be making these kinds of calls. The point is that it's their ideas, not yours, so don't encroach on that by not involving them in decisions that ultimately affect their artistic expression.

Oh, and I'm not going to bother commenting much on this because Henry already did a pretty good job up above. Go back up and read his comments about hearing himself during his formative years. He made a really excellent point there. How is a young kid ever gonna get better if you fix stuff for him and he is never pushed to get any better? If you, and others like you, basically stunt his growth, we're going to continue to have bands popping up that aren't actually all that talented and can't "bring it to the table" when it comes time to play live. If you do this for one band, four more are gonna come in wanting the same thing. So you see, you would be compounding the problem. If you put out the cheese, the rats will come. It's as simple as that.

So you see, your actions do affect the rest of us. If you do these types of things, you help feed the monster that is consuming "music as we know it" right now. You help put bands out there that shouldn't have been. Why feed the corporate led, downward spiral of music and add another manufactured band to the heap of soulless crap that currently surrounds us? We need another "Nirvana" to come stomp all of the "perfect" but soulless "Nickelbacks" into the dust.

This is why you're wrong and why you've been "attacked". Out of all of the gear in a studio, the engineer should be the least colored and most transparent of them all.

[PoorGlory]

Good, then it's settled. I'm wrong and you're right. End thread.

I wish there was a emoticon for what I am feeling right now. I'm thinking like one smiley jacking off and puking while another smiley furiously types away anonymously on a blog that only a fraction of people care about. Because that's how stupid this thread has become. How many pages of the same shit worded in different ways are there in this waste of cyberspace?